um hello….
​​​​​​​not being paid on par with the industry IS A CONCESSION

Also:
Why does the 737/320 pay less than the 777/787/350…..
More complex NO..
passenger count!
Wide body pay for wide body loads….

 

Amen brotha!

 

While I like the sentiment of your comment…we’ve always said the business model the company uses to make money is irrelevant to our job, so the pay should be commensurate with anybody else flying the same equipment. Under your argument, if Delta decided to outfit their A350s with 100 first class seats they could demand to make those pilots work for 717 pay rates. I’ll just stick to expecting to be paid what Delta”s A321neo pilots are paid.

 

350 with 100 seats …..a business class airline ……… Midwest ……. Fail

 

But their chocolate chip cookies were exceptional!

 

I’not debating the lunacy of the idea of putting 100 seats in a 350, I’m debating the argument that we should be paid by the number of seats rather than the gross weight of the aircraft.

 

How about using aircraft size/category to set the minimum pay (A320/321 industry standard rates) and then add a high-density seating override similar to a redeye or international override. The denser the seating the higher the override.

 

Sure that sounds great. But you know how our union will look at that idea…”what are you willing to give up for that?” The answer is “nothing” so why even bother with it? Whether there are 3 people or 300 people I’m still operating my jet in the way that gets ME back home to my family in the safest way possible. Industry standard (DL, UA) pay for A321neo is just fine with me and it’s a precedent already set.

 

While on the surface, your argument makes sense, in practicality is does not. And, it's quite silly to propose such.

The airline must, first and foremost, make money. A 350 w/ 100 FC seats won't. It's been tried. EVERYONE knows this so proposing it to make a point is the definition of a strawman.

We should be paid commensurate w/ the # of people the aircraft can carry. How much each passenger paid, whether the plane has wifi, whatever, is NOT our concern. We ensure the safety of 247 people on a fully loaded 321. It's that simple. The business model of HOW the company makes it's money is independent of the # of people flying. And if BB wants to lower the seat count just to pay less, he better be sure that plan will work. Otherwise,

We should be paid 767 rates. If we have to MODIFY the business model to do so, then I expect a management team that is intelligent/savvy enough to make those adjustments. This airlines USED to not be low cost. SWA started that way but aren't anymore. Even Spirit has a big front seat.

 

Duly noted. But you’re asking to set a precedent that doesn’t yet exist. Contracts have historically classified a/c by MGTOW and to change that will take either the company agreeing to it (won’t happen), a mediator convincing the company to agree to it (won’t happen), or us being released to strike and insisting on it (also highly unlikely). I’m sticking to my original expectations, pay me what an A321neo pilot is paid elsewhere. It’s a number that’s already been agreed upon at other carriers and an argument can be made for it in mediation and when requesting to be released to strike. Expecting to get 767 rates, no matter how convincing you make the argument, is a setup for disappointment.